Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Well...there is a simple solution to this parts issue..at least it is a partial solutionjust look for a parts chassis. A non working or broken radio and then keep it for parts. Ones in poor cosmetic contidion go pretty cheap. 73, Lee -Original Message- From: rhulett1 To: mike bryce Cc: Drakelist Sent: Sun, Jun 19, 2011 1:06 pm Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared Most recent purchase was a "mint" Omni C with a broken crystal carrier. They are no longer available from any source, including the factory. So, the "C" won't function on 30M. The on-off switch was also broken, not really an issue because use the PS switch anyway, but those not available either. Band switches are notorious and well-known issue for the 540-546. Replacements not available. Dial light for the 509 no longer available from any source. Of course, to be fair there are surely Drake parts that aren't available anymore ( like switch decks I suppose ). But, so fae for me personally, I've had nothing break that couldn't be replaced with readily available parts. From: "mike bryce" To: rhule...@comcast.net Cc: Drakelist@zerobeat.net Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2011 10:05:58 AM Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I have a bit of issue with that... with the exception of some solid state devices, RF transistors for the 444 amp comes to mind, I've never found ten tec did not stock a part, or had a working replacement for it for a radio I've have on my service bench. Sure, some parts or assemblies are long gone. I mean, when was the last time Drake sold a PTO for TR3? granted, you can't get cosmetic parts like knobs or front panels, but you can't get those from drake either. You can still get a PTO rebulid kit for a ten tec argonaut 505, built in 1973, so, I'd say, ten tec has a pretty good supply of parts for older radios, and if you have the money, they will be more than happy to install, and bring to factory specs that 505. mike bryce proso...@sssnet.com On Jun 18, 2011, at 2:27 PM, rhule...@comcast.net wrote: I own and enjoy both. Drake 4 line and 2B. Ten-Tec 509, 540, 544, 545, 546, 588. All except last purchased used of course. Only ones needing work were the Drakes and the newest Ten-Tec. The 588 recently revisited the factory for repair when 3 years old, of course Ten-Tec fixed it quickly but repair cost more than paid for any of the other rigs listed. I'm not capable of repairing the 588. If any of the old stuff breaks, I'd be forced to fix myself because the shipping would cost more than the rig is worth. One thing about the older Ten-Tec rigs, many of the failure-prone parts are unobtanium. So far, the items that have failed on the Drakes have been easily replaced. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Nothing below (with perhaps the exception of the bandswitch) that couldn't be repaired with a suitable "field expedient" replacement. Crystal holder, on off switch, dial lamps (?!!) ...all easily replaced with something that'll work. Power supply switch is a common rocker switch AFAIK. Bandswitches are a problem if bad, regardless of the make of the gear. The larger ones can have contact surgery applied (I've done this) but that problem is common to all gear. Most Tentec gear up to and including the Omni VI used simple single sided PWB's that are easy to service, with "spacious" layouts and sensible interconnects making for easy R&R. Now if only they had used good grease in their PTOs! :-) John K5MO At 01:05 PM 6/19/2011, rhule...@comcast.net wrote: Most recent purchase was a "mint" Omni C with a broken crystal carrier. They are no longer available from any source, including the factory. So, the "C" won't function on 30M. The on-off switch was also broken, not really an issue because use the PS switch anyway, but those not available either. Band switches are notorious and well-known issue for the 540-546. Replacements not available. Dial light for the 509 no longer available from any source. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Sorta true. GM is still (sort of) in the car making business too, but I doubt they could come up with an inside driver's door handle for your 1965 Oldsmobile. They're still in the business of making cars, and car door handles are still car door handles! Electronic components are still components too, just 1/10 the size. One of the beauty of the Drakes, and others of the time, is that most of the parts that fail are generic and available plenty of places. I don't see a third IF can as being any different than a door handle from that standpoint. The same is mostly true of the 7- Line, with the exception of a few ECL ICs that can be gotten, but are a challenge. Also, I'm sure Drake would be happy to sell you an IC for the R-8 series receivers! 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote: True but Drake is still in the business of making radios and associated electronics and components are still components. On 19-Jun-11 15:20, Don Cunningham wrote: Mike, That's really not a fair comparison, Drake having parts as opposed to Ten Tec. Drake went out of the ham business MANY years ago but carried parts until recent memory for many of their rigs and serviced them far beyond what other US manufacturers of ham gear did. On the other hand, Ten Tec advertises as still being in the ham business. 73, Don, WB5HAK ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
On Jun 19, 2011, at 8:05 PM, rhule...@comcast.net wrote: Dial light for the 509 no longer available from any source. Huh? The dial light is just two grain of wheat bulbs in series that glow a dull red with 12 volts, and slightly brighter on 13.8v. You could replace them with anything including the (relatively) new 180 degree LEDs. The S meter light is just a 12 volt long/life low brightness bulb with the usual bayonet end. I replaced mine with a drop in LED white replacement. I have LEDs for the dial lights, and decided that since mine still work, it was not worth my time to replace them. Eventually I will. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM Making your enemy reliant on software you support is the best revenge. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Most recent purchase was a "mint" Omni C with a broken crystal carrier. They are no longer available from any source, including the factory. So, the "C" won't function on 30M. The on-off switch was also broken, not really an issue because use the PS switch anyway, but those not available either. Band switches are notorious and well-known issue for the 540-546. Replacements not available. Dial light for the 509 no longer available from any source. Of course, to be fair there are surely Drake parts that aren't available anymore ( like switch decks I suppose ). But, so fa e for me personally, I've had nothing break that couldn't be replaced with readily available parts. - Original Message - From: "mike bryce" To: rhule...@comcast.net Cc: Drakelist@zerobeat.net Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2011 10:05:58 AM Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I have a bit of issue with that... with the exception of some solid state devices, RF transistors for the 444 amp comes to mind, I've never found ten tec did not stock a part, or had a working replacement for it for a radio I've have on my service bench. Sure, some parts or assemblies are long gone. I mean, when was the last time Drake sold a PTO for TR3? granted, you can't get cosmetic parts like knobs or front panels, but you can't get those from drake either. You can still get a PTO rebulid kit for a ten tec argonaut 505, built in 1973, so, I'd say, ten tec has a pretty good supply of parts for older radios, and if you have the money, they will be more than happy to install, and bring to factory specs that 505. mike bryce proso...@sssnet.com On Jun 18, 2011, at 2:27 PM, rhule...@comcast.net wrote: I own and enjoy both. Drake 4 line and 2B. Ten-Tec 509, 540, 544, 545, 546, 588. All except last purchased used of course. Only ones needing work were the Drakes and the newest Ten-Tec. The 588 recently revisited the factory for repair when 3 years old, of course Ten-Tec fixed it quickly but repair cost more than paid for any of the other rigs listed. I'm not capable of repairing the 588. If any of the old stuff breaks, I'd be forced to fix myself because the shipping would cost more than the rig is worth. One thing about the older Ten-Tec rigs, many of the failure-prone parts are unobtanium. So far, the items that have failed on the Drakes have been easily replaced. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:58:14 +, Nigel Gunn G8IFF/W8IFF wrote: >True but Drake is still in the business of making radios and associated >electronics and components are still components. Yes, but it's a different world today. Manufacturers have to stay competetive on a global scale in these days of "Lean Manufacturing" initiatives and everything that goes with that. The bean counters are in control, and anything that has a little dust on it, doesn't move, or isn't profitable goes into the dumpster (rubbish bin) without a second thought. 73 -Jim -- Ham Radio NU0C Lincoln, Nebraska, U.S.S.A. TR7/RV7/R7A/L7, TR6/RV6, T4XC/R4C/L4B, NCL2000, SB104A, R390A, GT550A/RV550A, HyGain 3750, IBM PS/2 - all vintage, all the time! "Give a man a URL, and he will learn for an hour; teach him to Google, and he will learn for a lifetime." HyGain 3750 User's Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HyGain_3750/ http://incolor.inetnebr.com/jshorney http://www.nebraskaghosts.org ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
True but Drake is still in the business of making radios and associated electronics and components are still components. On 19-Jun-11 15:20, Don Cunningham wrote: Mike, That's really not a fair comparison, Drake having parts as opposed to Ten Tec. Drake went out of the ham business MANY years ago but carried parts until recent memory for many of their rigs and serviced them far beyond what other US manufacturers of ham gear did. On the other hand, Ten Tec advertises as still being in the ham business. 73, Don, WB5HAK ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist -- Nigel A. Gunn, 1865 El Camino Drive, Xenia, OH 45385-1115, USA. tel +1 937 825 5032 Amateur Radio G8IFF W8IFF (was KC8NHF 9H3GN), e-mail ni...@ngunn.net www http://www.ngunn.net Member of ARRL, GQRP #11396, QRPARCI #11644, SOC #548, Flying Pigs QRP Club International #385, Dayton ARA #2128, AMSAT-NA LM-1691, AMSAT-UK 0182, MKARS, ALC, GCARES, XWARN, EAA382. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Mike, That's really not a fair comparison, Drake having parts as opposed to Ten Tec. Drake went out of the ham business MANY years ago but carried parts until recent memory for many of their rigs and serviced them far beyond what other US manufacturers of ham gear did. On the other hand, Ten Tec advertises as still being in the ham business. 73, Don, WB5HAK___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I have a bit of issue with that... with the exception of some solid state devices, RF transistors for the 444 amp comes to mind, I've never found ten tec did not stock a part, or had a working replacement for it for a radio I've have on my service bench. Sure, some parts or assemblies are long gone. I mean, when was the last time Drake sold a PTO for TR3? granted, you can't get cosmetic parts like knobs or front panels, but you can't get those from drake either. You can still get a PTO rebulid kit for a ten tec argonaut 505, built in 1973, so, I'd say, ten tec has a pretty good supply of parts for older radios, and if you have the money, they will be more than happy to install, and bring to factory specs that 505. mike bryce proso...@sssnet.com On Jun 18, 2011, at 2:27 PM, rhule...@comcast.net wrote: > I own and enjoy both. Drake 4 line and 2B. Ten-Tec 509, 540, 544, 545, > 546, 588. All except last purchased used of course. Only ones needing work > were the Drakes and the newest Ten-Tec. The 588 recently revisited the > factory for repair when 3 years old, of course Ten-Tec fixed it quickly but > repair cost more than paid for any of the other rigs listed. I'm not capable > of repairing the 588. If any of the old stuff breaks, I'd be forced to fix > myself because the shipping would cost more than the rig is worth. One thing > about the older Ten-Tec rigs, many of the failure-prone parts are unobtanium. > So far, the items that have failed on the Drakes have been easily replaced. > > > ___ > Drakelist mailing list > Drakelist@zerobeat.net > http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I've got a Tentec Paragon, OmniVI+, Corsair 2, and the Centurion amp and an Omni B, plus some of the early QRP gear. The only issue I had was with the amp, the rest have been flawless and work great. Early Tentec stuff is kind of iffy from a mechanical standpoint. String and pulley dials have never been my favorite, but they're wonderful CW machines. The OmniVI /Centurion amp is a full break-in 1300 watt DX hunter of the first order. It's my main station and works great with it's RS232 interface and the ergometrics are vastly improved from earlier rigs (Corsair, Omni B). I suspect my Omni will still be working as the pile of unfixable FT1000s failures continues to grow. I think there's excellent parallels between the design of the TT gear and Drakes. I love them both and use them often. John k5MO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Exactly...that's why I prefer vintageand TT. By the way the TT is still the standard in QSK. My Orion II and the Alpha work super together. The K3 is pretty good too...maybe as good. My friend that has one says it is great and he had a OII before (and admits he would like to have it back) 73, Lee 260-403-6936 Cell -Original Message- From: Garey Barrell To: drakelist Sent: Sat, Jun 18, 2011 11:36 am Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I seem to have stepped on a few toes with my Ten-Tec characterization. Granted, that 'word' was quite common in the 70s and 80s, but they seem to have gotten their act together more recently. While I have never owned any of their gear (with the exception of a 1253 Regen) I have operated quite a few of their different transceivers. They all worked superbly, and certainly had the definitive QSK for the time. Obviously if you sell thousands of anything you're going to find a few that have a problem, and fewer still that match a problem with a 'problem' customer! One irate customer can make a lot of noise. I certainly don't intend to diss one of the few companies that manufacture Ham gear in the USA, but back then at least, you could ask just about any Ham and would get that 'word'! :-) Fast forward to today's imported radios, and service is just about impossible, even for the factory. The multiplicity of 'features' of questionable value, requiring an inch thick manual to decode all the multiple button presses have a lot more to 'go wrong'. On the bright side, there are probably thousands of those 'features' that don't work, but the owner either never tried them, or figured he just wasn't getting the right rhythm on the button!! :-) This doesn't even consider the 250 pin flat-pak ICs that were custom built in limited quantity, and are only available as a complete board swap. The price we pay for 'progress'. One of the nicest features of the TR-7 is that there are only a couple of somewhat difficult to find components. ALL were originally multi-sourced, standard catalog parts, aside from cosmetic stuff. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Duane...I agree...for sure. TT still supports the very old stuff as well...no one else does that. For me it's all American Made...I have NO Japanese radios (I used to) so between TT, Collins, Drake, Halli...I'm all USA. 73, Lee KC9CDT -Original Message- From: Duane Calvin To: k4oah ; drakelist Sent: Sat, Jun 18, 2011 10:01 am Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared Huh. Of six different pieces of TT equipment, only one ever needed repair. That was due to an early life (warranty) fail of a bias transistor, and I did the service with super help from TT guys. Two of the units were HF amps and neither of them had any trouble (other than a 3-500Z grid that fell into a cathode after years of service, much of it in RTTY mode.) Since the majority of folks who post on forums tend to be those with a gripe, I thought I'd post my experience which is the opposite. By contrast, I've sent a VHF rig back to Yaesu three times without a resolution of a problem, and finally gave up. Also had problems with an ICOM IC-765 that was my first "big rig". So, I find the negative criticism of TT to be misplaced, in my experience 73, Duane Duane Calvin, AC5AA Austin, Texas www.ac5aa.com -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Garey Barrell Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 10:06 PM To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared roncasa wrote: Garey Barrell wrote: One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' Let's be fair the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. You could be back on the air in no time. On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. Ron - Perhaps. All I can say is that in 50 years of using Drake equipment, only twice did I need to purchase a unique part from Drake to repair a radio. Other minor repairs were required over the years, but all were accomplished with locally available resistors and/or capacitors, with an occasional diode or transistor thrown in. I ran three R-4A/B setups for almost three years, 24/7 in autostart RTTY service with only one 'failure', and open filament in a 12BY7. Yes, a few PA tubes had to be replaced as the transmitters were run at full power, with keydown periods of up to 30 minutes. By contrast, it seemed like everyone I knew who had Ten-Tec equipment was often praising their 'excellent service support'. :-) 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I used to have a B-Line and loved it. Then I got a C-Line and I love it -- it's a keeper for the duration. On the Ten Tec gear, I picked up a really nice Corsair-II some years back and it seemed to me that it was almost designed to be a C-Line killer. It was a great CW rig with PBT, great filters etc. With the matching power supply and external VFO it was even about the same size as the Drake Twins. What was better than the C-Line was: 1) No tuning up. No big deal for rag chewing but really nice for contests. Especially NAQP where guys constantly ask me to move to another band to work them there. 2) Dual *simultaneous* VFO. With the external VFO you could listen to both VFO frequencies at the same time! This was the greatest feature of all time for working DX. You could listen to the DX on one VFO and the pile-up on the other with no flipping of switches. Truly remarkable feature that I do miss. 3) Unthinkably smooth full QSK. Hey, I liked the Corsair-II so much I sold it and bought an Omni-VII which I also like a lot (although I do miss that dual simultaneous VFO thing). But, through it all, the C-Line is still on center stage in my shack. It has more cool factor than any rig I've owned. Ever.. BTW, on the "you'll need the Ten Tec service department" issue I had the old Corsair-II for years and I still have a Centaur amp and the Omni-VII. I needed the Service Department for the bandswitch KNOB on the Centaur amp which gave out after many years. Cost me about $3 including shipping as I recall. Oh wait; that was the Parts Department. Never mind... 73, Doug, W7KF http://www.w7kf.com ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I own and enjoy both. Drake 4 line and 2B. Ten-Tec 509, 540, 544, 545, 546, 588. All except last purchased used of course. Only ones needing work were the Drakes and the newest Ten-Tec. The 588 recently revisited the factory for repair when 3 years old, of course Ten-Tec fixed it quickly but repair cost more than paid for any of the other rigs listed. I'm not capable of repairing the 588. If any of the old stuff breaks, I'd be forced to fix myself because the shipping would cost more than the rig is worth. One thing about the older Ten-Tec rigs, many of the failure-prone parts are unobtanium. So far, the items that have failed on the Drakes have been easily replaced. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
They also bear a striking resemblance to HP or Tektronix test equipment. 73, Duane Duane Calvin, AC5AA Austin, Texas www.ac5aa.com -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Paul Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 10:44 AM To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I noticed something several years agoTen Tec 's from the Corsair and all models through the Omni VI plus strike a resemblance cosmetically somewhat to the TR7...in that the front panel is made from a single extruded piece of aluminum with a raised horizontal "bar" that divides the top of the front panel where the freq display is,from the bottom section where all the controls are located. Not exactly the same,but very similar. Even used similar plastic end caps Coincidence? or was it intentional? Certainly not copied from a offshore radio design, can't recall any Yeacomwoods that resembled the TR7. Flattery is the most sincere compliment AD3G On 6/17/2011 12:51 AM, Darrell Bellerive wrote: > Wow, what a great thread on Collins vs. Drake. I've never had the > privilege of using any Collins gear, so this has been very enlightening. > Thanks all for keeping this so objective. > > It seems Ten-Tec came along much later in the game than Drake or > Collins, but also has a high regard from their owners. With the head > start that Drake and Collins had, perhaps it is not as fair a comparison. > > In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs > in the early 80's. > > So, how about a comparison of the Drake 4 and 7 lines with the above > mentioned Ten-Tec rigs? > > 73, > Darrell > VA7TO > > ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Duane and all, I purchased a Ten-Tec Triton IV new back in the mid '70s and used it until 2000 as my only HF rig. The only problem I had with it was with the contacts of the reed relay for transmit/receive getting dirty because of lack of current, and that was fixed with a company-developed modification that I installed. It was stable, the final amp was rugged, the AGC worked great, and the QSK was unparalleled at the time. It was great for both CW and SSB. I'd probably still be using it if it had covered the WARC bands, but it predated them. 73, Bob AD3K -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Duane Calvin Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 9:59 AM To: k4...@mindspring.com; drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared Huh. Of six different pieces of TT equipment, only one ever needed repair. That was due to an early life (warranty) fail of a bias transistor, and I did the service with super help from TT guys. Two of the units were HF amps and neither of them had any trouble (other than a 3-500Z grid that fell into a cathode after years of service, much of it in RTTY mode.) Since the majority of folks who post on forums tend to be those with a gripe, I thought I'd post my experience which is the opposite. By contrast, I've sent a VHF rig back to Yaesu three times without a resolution of a problem, and finally gave up. Also had problems with an ICOM IC-765 that was my first "big rig". So, I find the negative criticism of TT to be misplaced, in my experience 73, Duane Duane Calvin, AC5AA Austin, Texas www.ac5aa.com -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Garey Barrell Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 10:06 PM To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared roncasa wrote: > Garey Barrell wrote: >> >> >> One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that >> Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. >> They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the >> defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding >> service department!' >> > > Let's be fair > the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability > > The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. > You could be back on the air in no time. > On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. > Ron - Perhaps. All I can say is that in 50 years of using Drake equipment, only twice did I need to purchase a unique part from Drake to repair a radio. Other minor repairs were required over the years, but all were accomplished with locally available resistors and/or capacitors, with an occasional diode or transistor thrown in. I ran three R-4A/B setups for almost three years, 24/7 in autostart RTTY service with only one 'failure', and open filament in a 12BY7. Yes, a few PA tubes had to be replaced as the transmitters were run at full power, with keydown periods of up to 30 minutes. By contrast, it seemed like everyone I knew who had Ten-Tec equipment was often praising their 'excellent service support'. :-) 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I noticed something several years agoTen Tec 's from the Corsair and all models through the Omni VI plus strike a resemblance cosmetically somewhat to the TR7...in that the front panel is made from a single extruded piece of aluminum with a raised horizontal "bar" that divides the top of the front panel where the freq display is,from the bottom section where all the controls are located. Not exactly the same,but very similar. Even used similar plastic end caps Coincidence? or was it intentional? Certainly not copied from a offshore radio design, can't recall any Yeacomwoods that resembled the TR7. Flattery is the most sincere compliment AD3G On 6/17/2011 12:51 AM, Darrell Bellerive wrote: Wow, what a great thread on Collins vs. Drake. I've never had the privilege of using any Collins gear, so this has been very enlightening. Thanks all for keeping this so objective. It seems Ten-Tec came along much later in the game than Drake or Collins, but also has a high regard from their owners. With the head start that Drake and Collins had, perhaps it is not as fair a comparison. In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs in the early 80's. So, how about a comparison of the Drake 4 and 7 lines with the above mentioned Ten-Tec rigs? 73, Darrell VA7TO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I seem to have stepped on a few toes with my Ten-Tec characterization. Granted, that 'word' was quite common in the 70s and 80s, but they seem to have gotten their act together more recently. While I have never owned any of their gear (with the exception of a 1253 Regen) I have operated quite a few of their different transceivers. They all worked superbly, and certainly had the definitive QSK for the time. Obviously if you sell thousands of anything you're going to find a few that have a problem, and fewer still that match a problem with a 'problem' customer! One irate customer can make a lot of noise. I certainly don't intend to diss one of the few companies that manufacture Ham gear in the USA, but back then at least, you could ask just about any Ham and would get that 'word'! :-) Fast forward to today's imported radios, and service is just about impossible, even for the factory. The multiplicity of 'features' of questionable value, requiring an inch thick manual to decode all the multiple button presses have a lot more to 'go wrong'. On the bright side, there are probably thousands of those 'features' that don't work, but the owner either never tried them, or figured he just wasn't getting the right rhythm on the button!! :-) This doesn't even consider the 250 pin flat-pak ICs that were custom built in limited quantity, and are only available as a complete board swap. The price we pay for 'progress'. One of the nicest features of the TR-7 is that there are only a couple of somewhat difficult to find components. ALL were originally multi-sourced, standard catalog parts, aside from cosmetic stuff. 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Same here, never had to send any of my present or past Ten Tec's back nor have I had to consult with them concerning service. Present station is the original Orion, early Omni 6+, Titan amp with 1998 date code tubes and a Centurion 3-500Z amp. Having a "friend" who had bad luck with TT service dept is like all the reviews on Eham who have the same story. I will mention a local ham who had to send his Icom 7800 back to Icom twice for final amp failures. I have had two failures with an Icom 703, but both were my fault for using it to check resonance with antennas instead of digging out the MFJ-259, so we all have had good and bad experiences with various gear. Let's get back to the Drake gear, especially since it's been years since you could deal with them for service. I like to think as long as parts for all the vintage gear is available, one will continue to enjoy keeping them on the air. Robb NØRU -Original Message- From: Duane Calvin Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 7:59 AM To: k4...@mindspring.com ; drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared Huh. Of six different pieces of TT equipment, only one ever needed repair. That was due to an early life (warranty) fail of a bias transistor, and I did the service with super help from TT guys. Two of the units were HF amps and neither of them had any trouble (other than a 3-500Z grid that fell into a cathode after years of service, much of it in RTTY mode.) Since the majority of folks who post on forums tend to be those with a gripe, I thought I'd post my experience which is the opposite. By contrast, I've sent a VHF rig back to Yaesu three times without a resolution of a problem, and finally gave up. Also had problems with an ICOM IC-765 that was my first "big rig". So, I find the negative criticism of TT to be misplaced, in my experience 73, Duane Duane Calvin, AC5AA Austin, Texas www.ac5aa.com -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Garey Barrell Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 10:06 PM To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared roncasa wrote: Garey Barrell wrote: One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' Let's be fair the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. You could be back on the air in no time. On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. Ron - Perhaps. All I can say is that in 50 years of using Drake equipment, only twice did I need to purchase a unique part from Drake to repair a radio. Other minor repairs were required over the years, but all were accomplished with locally available resistors and/or capacitors, with an occasional diode or transistor thrown in. I ran three R-4A/B setups for almost three years, 24/7 in autostart RTTY service with only one 'failure', and open filament in a 12BY7. Yes, a few PA tubes had to be replaced as the transmitters were run at full power, with keydown periods of up to 30 minutes. By contrast, it seemed like everyone I knew who had Ten-Tec equipment was often praising their 'excellent service support'. :-) 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I can say I have had both. Each has its distinct advantages. I enjoyed my B Line. Sadly I let it go about a year ago. The R-4B was and is a great receiver. Had a TR7. Receiver was a little hash for my ears. Overall a good rig (an equal performer to my Kenwood TS-830S).. I now own an Ten-Tec Omni VII. Do I think it's better than the Drakes? Receiver seems to win out, over all of the above (I have the extra filters installed). Good reports on transmit audio. Sometimes, the menus are a bit cumbersome but easily learned. Service, well only one experience and it was not with the radio. They seemed no worse nor better than anyone else, as of late and that includes non-amateur equipment (try dealing with huge IT companies, and it is not just Microsoft, they really put the spin on poor customer service). What would I do again, keep the B Line just for casual ragchewing. The Omni for digging folks out of noise and QRM and running digital modes. The Kenwood will remain the backup rig until it turns to dust. 73 W5BXE___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Huh. Of six different pieces of TT equipment, only one ever needed repair. That was due to an early life (warranty) fail of a bias transistor, and I did the service with super help from TT guys. Two of the units were HF amps and neither of them had any trouble (other than a 3-500Z grid that fell into a cathode after years of service, much of it in RTTY mode.) Since the majority of folks who post on forums tend to be those with a gripe, I thought I'd post my experience which is the opposite. By contrast, I've sent a VHF rig back to Yaesu three times without a resolution of a problem, and finally gave up. Also had problems with an ICOM IC-765 that was my first "big rig". So, I find the negative criticism of TT to be misplaced, in my experience 73, Duane Duane Calvin, AC5AA Austin, Texas www.ac5aa.com -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Garey Barrell Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 10:06 PM To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared roncasa wrote: > Garey Barrell wrote: >> >> >> One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that >> Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. >> They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the >> defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding >> service department!' >> > > Let's be fair > the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability > > The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. > You could be back on the air in no time. > On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. > Ron - Perhaps. All I can say is that in 50 years of using Drake equipment, only twice did I need to purchase a unique part from Drake to repair a radio. Other minor repairs were required over the years, but all were accomplished with locally available resistors and/or capacitors, with an occasional diode or transistor thrown in. I ran three R-4A/B setups for almost three years, 24/7 in autostart RTTY service with only one 'failure', and open filament in a 12BY7. Yes, a few PA tubes had to be replaced as the transmitters were run at full power, with keydown periods of up to 30 minutes. By contrast, it seemed like everyone I knew who had Ten-Tec equipment was often praising their 'excellent service support'. :-) 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I have had the TT Orion II since it came out, use it all the time, never had even 1 glitchlet alone send it for service. 73, Lee -Original Message- From: Bob W5GU To: drakelist Sent: Fri, Jun 17, 2011 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I have a friend that has had Ten Tec equipment since the 1970s and I would agree completely with Garey's "word in the Ham community". Every one of his rigs has spent a lot of ground time (truck time) going to Tennessee and back. It's also true about the outstanding service department too. He's happy about it. On 6/17/11 5:51 PM, roncasa wrote: Garey Barrell wrote: One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' Let's be fair the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. You could be back on the air in no time. On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. 72 Ron, wb1hga "God sneezed. I didn't know what to say to him " ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Darrell and all, My Collins 310B, which qualifies as a vintage transmitter (c. 1947) has a phase shift sidetone oscillator. However, when I've used it, I've use a Johnson TR switch so I can hear my transmitted signal. It makes for great QSK operation if you're not working split. My TR7A of course has a sidetone, but I've never owned Drake separates, so I have no experience using them for CW. 73, Bob AD3K -Original Message- From: drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net [mailto:drakelist-boun...@zerobeat.net] On Behalf Of Darrell Bellerive Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 3:16 PM To: drakelist@zerobeat.net Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I notice the use of sidetones, and receiver muting does not seem to be commonly used in separate operation on the same frequency. Obviously sidetone would be needed when operating on different transmit and receive frequencies. I have often wondered about the lack of sidetone circuits in vintage transmitters. I have always had transcievers and sidetone, so it all just seems odd to me. :-) 73, Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Station VA7TO On 06/17/11 10:18, Paul Christensen wrote: > The beauty of this system is that the PIN diode switch allows just > enough Tx to Rx leakage for one to get about a 10 dB over S9 signal on > the receiver while transmitting in CW. So, you're listing to your own > signal in real time and switching is so fast that your own signal is > heard as just another signal on the band. The Tx and Rx VFOs are > free-running and do not have the handicap of needing to switch by the > amount of the CW offset between T/R excursions. > > Paul, W9AC ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Well, I am one of the "few" I guess that was put off Ten Tec radios BY the so called fabulous Ten Tec service department. That must have been an old, retired by now service dept. I had nothing but grief with Paul Clinton, service manager, in specific and usually had to get sales to get any parts I needed. His cure was ALWAYS send it in and he treated me like an idiot that didn't know how to turn a knob. NEVER found that with Drake in all my years with them. Bill Frost was a comsumate gentleman, even with my very dumb questions at times. I had an Omni V, Omni 6+, Omni VII and Orion II and had the same poor service performance with all of them. The first two were bought with problems known and did need service, the last two were new radios that I tried and I met the same problem when I wanted anything. Now I feel better. I couldn't let the "great Ten Tec service" myth continue with this present service manager. 73, Don ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
roncasa wrote: Garey Barrell wrote: One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' Let's be fair the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. You could be back on the air in no time. On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. Ron - Perhaps. All I can say is that in 50 years of using Drake equipment, only twice did I need to purchase a unique part from Drake to repair a radio. Other minor repairs were required over the years, but all were accomplished with locally available resistors and/or capacitors, with an occasional diode or transistor thrown in. I ran three R-4A/B setups for almost three years, 24/7 in autostart RTTY service with only one 'failure', and open filament in a 12BY7. Yes, a few PA tubes had to be replaced as the transmitters were run at full power, with keydown periods of up to 30 minutes. By contrast, it seemed like everyone I knew who had Ten-Tec equipment was often praising their 'excellent service support'. :-) 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I have a friend that has had Ten Tec equipment since the 1970s and I would agree completely with Garey's "word in the Ham community". Every one of his rigs has spent a lot of ground time (truck time) going to Tennessee and back. It's also true about the outstanding service department too. He's happy about it. On 6/17/11 5:51 PM, roncasa wrote: Garey Barrell wrote: One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' Let's be fair the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. You could be back on the air in no time. On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. 72 Ron, wb1hga "God sneezed. I didn't know what to say to him " ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Garey Barrell wrote: One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' Let's be fair the same is true for other manufacturers of ham radio products regarding reliability The difference here is that you could almost repair TT radio at home. You could be back on the air in no time. On the other hand, you may have to send other radio brands for service and wait weeks. 72 Ron, wb1hga "God sneezed. I didn't know what to say to him " ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
- Original Message - From: "Darrell Bellerive" To: Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared I notice the use of sidetones, and receiver muting does not seem to be commonly used in separate operation on the same frequency. Obviously sidetone would be needed when operating on different transmit and receive frequencies. I have often wondered about the lack of sidetone circuits in vintage transmitters. I have always had transcievers and sidetone, so it all just seems odd to me. :-) 73, Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Station VA7TO I think it depends on how vintage. The first Collins 32V transmitters had side tone but it was discontinued in the 32V-3, the reason given was that they could not meet TVI suppression specs with it. I think most of the Johnson transmitters had it. Not sure of others. Side tone is useful if you are transmitting on a different frequency than receiving, common for DX. For other purposes I always monitored in the receiver, there being enough leakage signal so that I could hear my own. There are a lot of curiousities in both receiver and transmitter design and features offered. For instance, Johnson included a speech clipper and filter in the Valliant but Collins never did in the 32V series although they did in the much more expensive 30K and KW-1. It may have been simply a matter of cost. One of the few places where a thorough analysis of design and cost can be found is in the Collins documents for the R-390A. This was probably a much more thorough investigation than was typical for a production product anywhere outside of the telephone company. At some point, in any project, one has to stop trying to make it better and begin to make it or decide that it shouldn't be made at all. In the case of the R-390 the cost of all that investigating was probably absorbed by the government contracts (meaning you the taxpayer), in general, development costs have to be paid for out of profits, if any, on a new product so that when a project is cancelled it can be quite expensive. I don't know that a lot of absolute dogs got into production but at least some did. To me the Hammarlund Pro-310 is the prime example, a very poor receiver however sexy looking, that should never have been approved for production. It would be interesting to know what had happened at Hammarlund that led to this since they seem to have fallen off the edge altogether at about that time. -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles WB6KBL dickb...@ix.netcom.com ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
I notice the use of sidetones, and receiver muting does not seem to be commonly used in separate operation on the same frequency. Obviously sidetone would be needed when operating on different transmit and receive frequencies. I have often wondered about the lack of sidetone circuits in vintage transmitters. I have always had transcievers and sidetone, so it all just seems odd to me. :-) 73, Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Station VA7TO On 06/17/11 10:18, Paul Christensen wrote: > The beauty of this system is that the PIN diode switch allows just > enough Tx to Rx leakage for one to get about a 10 dB over S9 signal on > the receiver while transmitting in CW. So, you're listing to your own > signal in real time and switching is so fast that your own signal is > heard as just another signal on the band. The Tx and Rx VFOs are > free-running and do not have the handicap of needing to switch by the > amount of the CW offset between T/R excursions. > > Paul, W9AC ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Darrell - Ten-Tec started out making small solid state transceivers very similar to some of the QRP kits being offered today. They came with a nice punched and labeled cabinet, and were sold as the Powermite PM-1, PM-2 and PM-3. There were several 'flavors' of these models with various features/bands added. The also sold just the wired and tested PC boards to be installed in your own cabinet. They graduated to more and more complex radios, using the same 'modular' approach. Opening up some of the early units was like looking inside a homebrew radio, with little PC boards mounted in various orientations, wired together in a rather hap-hazard way. I don't know when they progressed to a more 'finished' product, but eventually they manufactured near 'state of the art' transceivers, with an emphasis on CW and QSK operation. For a while they were almost alone in the lead in the QSK market, and still make a quality transceiver. One thing about Ten-Tec gear. The 'word' in the Ham community was that, 'The good news is that Ten-Tec has an outstanding service department, with friendly, helpful techs readily available. They very often will ship a replacement board on the promise that you would send back the defective one.' 'The bad news is, you are almost certainly going to NEED that outstanding service department!' 73, Garey - K4OAH Glen Allen, VA Drake 2-B, 2-C/2-NT, 4-A, 4-B, C-Line and TR-4/C Service Supplement CDs Darrell Bellerive wrote: Wow, what a great thread on Collins vs. Drake. I've never had the privilege of using any Collins gear, so this has been very enlightening. Thanks all for keeping this so objective. It seems Ten-Tec came along much later in the game than Drake or Collins, but also has a high regard from their owners. With the head start that Drake and Collins had, perhaps it is not as fair a comparison. In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs in the early 80's. So, how about a comparison of the Drake 4 and 7 lines with the above mentioned Ten-Tec rigs? 73, Darrell VA7TO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Ten-Tec definitely catered to the QSK CW crowd. I know that the Drake 4-line could be made to work QSK with an external T/R switch. Has anyone on list done this and can comment on the QSK performance? Escpecially how it compares to Ten-Tec's QSK. Darrell: I'm using my C Line in QSK mode with the help of: (1) Ameritron QSK-5 PIN diode T/R switch; and (2) a PIC-based CW keyer. The keyer is the device that establishes complete system timing. New keyers have the ability to adjust the lead-in and tail times between the Keyed output and PTT line. So, it's now possible to use classic separates in super-fast QSK mode. By fast I mean near full-duplex. The supreme irony is that with this set-up it's possible to attain significantly faster and seamless QSK with say...a Heathkit DX-60 and Drake R-4B than a Ten Tec Orion II. The system works around the existing C Line T/R system and requires no equipment modification. Well, as an option one could bring out another buffered PTT output from the QSK-5 to bias the T-4Xx transmitter when in SSB mode. Or, just let Ip idle all the time. An even better system is being developed between myself and a keyer manufacturer. It will allow for independent lead-in and tail times such that one can look at the keyed CW RF envelope on a scope and customize timing to active the PIN diode switch moment exactly 1 msec before transmit RF and 1 msec after the trailing tail of the CW envelope -- and that's extremely important with Drake gear since the CW envelope rise in only about 2 msec, but has the classic grid-block keying characteristics of a long R/C non-linear discharge as it asymptotically reaches zero. This system only works for "separates." For the past thirty years, manufacturers have had to compromise on QSK performance in order to contend with PLL and synthesizer settling times. Transceivers generally use the same oscillator for Tx and RX but the oscillator does not settle fast enough between T and R to allow for super-fast QSK. That's why you see T/R turnaround times in QST Product Reviews in the range of 10-30 msec, the longest of which is the Flex-Radio gear. With the Flex, there's just too much latency to achieve any semblance of QSK. Direct RF sampling shows the best promise for future QSK performance from SDR transceivers as hardware handles the lion's share of processing horsepower and not a Microsoft Windows software application (e.g., PowerSDR). The beauty of this system is that the PIN diode switch allows just enough Tx to Rx leakage for one to get about a 10 dB over S9 signal on the receiver while transmitting in CW. So, you're listing to your own signal in real time and switching is so fast that your own signal is heard as just another signal on the band. The Tx and Rx VFOs are free-running and do not have the handicap of needing to switch by the amount of the CW offset between T/R excursions. Paul, W9AC ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
My only Ten-Tec rig was an Argo 509. I was very impressed with the receiver, except for the AGC pops. I sold it years ago, so a side by side comparison with my Drake 2B is not possible. If my memory is correct, I would give the edge to the 2B. I really like my 2B. Someday perhaps I can collect a Triton IV, Corsair, R-4B, TR-7, and compare them all side by side. I doubt I will ever spend the money on a Collins, but My impression of the early Ten-Tec's were that they tried to keep the price down more than Drake and much more than Collins. Cheaper cases, knobs, etc. The PTO rebuild frequency of the Ten-Tec may also stem from this as well. Ten-Tec definitely catered to the QSK CW crowd. I know that the Drake 4-line could be made to work QSK with an external T/R switch. Has anyone on list done this and can comment on the QSK performance? Escpecially how it compares to Ten-Tec's QSK. 73, Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Station VA7TO On 06/16/11 22:14, geoffrey mendelson wrote: > > On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Darrell Bellerive wrote: > >> In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs >> in the early 80's. > > > Before the Corsairs, with the Tritons, Argos, early OMNIs and Century > (21,22, 22 digital display) rigs Ten-Tec went for simplicity of design > and good sound. > > Compared to the design of the Colins (sophistocated and no expense > spared), the Drake (near genius), the Ten-Tec rigs look like they were > designed by copying pages from Doug DeMaw's books. > > I am NOT saying that the Ten-Tec rigs are poor performers, far from it. > For casual rag chewing, I'd put my Argo 509 or Trition IV Digital > (display, not oscillator) against any modern rig. > > In the Drake rigs I've seen every part is carefully placed, every wire > carefully run, every joint carefully soldered. My SPR-4 manual warns > against changing the length or route of wires as it may affect performance. > > I don't know if it would affect the Ten-Tec rigs in the same way, but it > does not seem so. The designs seem to be simple circuits. The Century > rigs have direct coversion receivers. > > Geoff. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
At 01:14 AM 6/17/2011, geoffrey mendelson wrote: I am NOT saying that the Ten-Tec rigs are poor performers, far from it. For casual rag chewing, I'd put my Argo 509 or Trition IV Digital (display, not oscillator) against any modern rig. Tentec has produced some of the best CW rigs available from anyone at any price. They continue that tradition today, though they're trying to establish a presence in the SSB crowd as well. I'd place TT in with Drake. Radios that work far far better than a cursory view inside the chassis would lead you to believe. Oh, and they both use all white interconnect wire :-) (at least up thru the Omni VI series) John K5MO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
Re: [Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:51 AM, Darrell Bellerive wrote: In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs in the early 80's. Before the Corsairs, with the Tritons, Argos, early OMNIs and Century (21,22, 22 digital display) rigs Ten-Tec went for simplicity of design and good sound. Compared to the design of the Colins (sophistocated and no expense spared), the Drake (near genius), the Ten-Tec rigs look like they were designed by copying pages from Doug DeMaw's books. I am NOT saying that the Ten-Tec rigs are poor performers, far from it. For casual rag chewing, I'd put my Argo 509 or Trition IV Digital (display, not oscillator) against any modern rig. In the Drake rigs I've seen every part is carefully placed, every wire carefully run, every joint carefully soldered. My SPR-4 manual warns against changing the length or route of wires as it may affect performance. I don't know if it would affect the Ten-Tec rigs in the same way, but it does not seem so. The designs seem to be simple circuits. The Century rigs have direct coversion receivers. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM Making your enemy reliant on software you support is the best revenge. ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
[Drakelist] Ten-Tec and Drake Compared
Wow, what a great thread on Collins vs. Drake. I've never had the privilege of using any Collins gear, so this has been very enlightening. Thanks all for keeping this so objective. It seems Ten-Tec came along much later in the game than Drake or Collins, but also has a high regard from their owners. With the head start that Drake and Collins had, perhaps it is not as fair a comparison. In the 70's Ten-Tec had the Tritons, and early Omni's, with the Corsairs in the early 80's. So, how about a comparison of the Drake 4 and 7 lines with the above mentioned Ten-Tec rigs? 73, Darrell VA7TO -- Darrell Bellerive Amateur Radio Station VA7TO ___ Drakelist mailing list Drakelist@zerobeat.net http://mailman.zerobeat.net/mailman/listinfo/drakelist
